Re: [HELP] .htaccess problem.......thanks.
Hello Cato:
First , i must say "Thank you for ur help" :-)
You got me a very useful advices and you are right ! when i use command line search without (-D "uid=tester,dc=ezplay,dc=tv")
its have NOT search any entry in my ldap.....result as follow:
====================
ldapsearch -W -x -h localhost -b "dc=ezplay,dc=tv" '(&(objectclass=*)(uid=axa.cheng))' Enter LDAP Password:
version: 2
#
# filter: (&(objectclass=*)(uid=axa.cheng))
# requesting: ALL
#
# search result
search: 2
result: 0 Success
# numResponses: 1
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
no more "numEntries" entry above..........y____y
Anyway, could u explain ur advice that
"Try doing the command line search without the -D parameter. If you get no match, you may look at the access rights to your directory."
Sorry, i dont know which "access rights to your directory" that i need to check ?
Apache RootDocument directory permission??? or .htaccess or slapd.conf or whatever???
BTW , i have tried use .htpasswd + .htaccess to restrict web WITHOUT ldap+.htaccess!
IT IS WORKING! i CAN use legal account to pass through .htaccess authenication
● Non-ldap .htaccess as follow:
AuthType Basic
AuthName "NON LDAP testing"
AuthUserFile /var/www/admin/.htpasswd
<Limit GET POST>
order deny,allow
deny from all
allow from all
require valid-user
</Limit>
Do You want more configuration or information in my OpenLDAP server ???
Feel free to let me knows, i would provide it to u.... :-)
> Hello,
>
> your problem seems to be that when Apache is doing the LDAP search, it
> does not get any match, while when you are doing a command line search,
> you get one match.
>
> One difference between the searches is that you specify a user which is
> used to bind to the LDAP directory (-D "uid=tester,dc=ezplay,dc=tv"),
> while Apache doesn't bind as a specific user.
> Try doing the command line search without the -D parameter. If you get
> no match, you may look at the access rights to your directory.
>
> Regards,
>
> Cato Aune
--
Trust & Unique ...
axacheng <axanet@ms32.hinet.net>
Reply to: